Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Markham
Yes anyone can point a camera at a naked girl. And that market is flooded, saturated and largely worth very little to most of the individuals. Shooters, affiliates or site owners. Yes some make a living. And some make a very good living.
the flaw in your argument is obvious. Until 2008 there was still a number of magazines to sell to paying $600 to $3,000 a set non exclusive. so every guy coming out of your sector of "amateurs" who were suddenly able to find hot new models and shooting them for ATK for $300 a set and video exclusive. Was either a fool or lacking something.
Even the great Dean Capture couldn't dream of earning $3,000 from a single solo girl set that he still would own and still earn a living from. So is he a fool or not able to rise to where I was very successful?
Then there are sites like Met Art, sites at the top of the tree that couldn't source the product from anyone with a digital camera and access to a few hot girls. Yet when they did, they had a product that wasn't cloned on 100s or even 1,000s of sites.
OK with enough practice anyone can pull out a few decent images from a set. Stick them on GFY and have everyone thinking they are great shooters. Yet how many can put a scene together like this?
http://www.saboom.com/en/stars/ferre...e-minishow_434
How many can afford to pay Madalton the money to shoot that?
How many can get a hot girl who is there for the money, thinks the shooter is a perv, get her to act like she thinks he's hot and pull out the performance that makes the viewer think she's worth the price of a membership?
That's the flaw in MisterPeabody's debate. Anyone can drive traffic. How many can drive enough.
Otherwise how do I sell content and memberships?
Anyone can tae a picture or video.
Anyone can drive traffic.
Anyone can use Photoshop.
The trick is doing it well enough to retire at 58. Yes I know it was late, but I was seeing naked girls every day, not a keyboard and screen.  |
I suppose from a content producer's point of view you would be correct. Those days are over now. The big guys have their own inhouse production, there are still a few pros and there aren't the sites like there used to be. Some porn shops like NastyDollars or BangBros have their style of shooting using Nikon AK47's. Others, and a very successful niche to boot, relies on girls self-shooting with cell phones and handhelds.
The cat is out of the bag, the horse has left the barn and nothing is going to change any of that. No one on GFY is going share not one shred of their hard-earned knowledge with anyone else. It has to be stolen when published, then duplicated. Why? Because that is the working model for most of the webmasters out there now. I'm sure there are a lot of hard working webmasters that have found avenues of income beyond the convention website. I know I have and I think it will carry me very well into retirement. Looking back though, isn't going to make any money for me because there is not much to learn from, basically a 15 year old Internet. The market changed right under you and me. You should have done very well and I hope you did. Some of the information you share, Paul, would have benefited me very well 10-12 years ago, so thanks for that. LOL
I suppose, GFY bozos not withstanding, provoking discourse does keep things fresh and interesting and, at least, gets people thinking (good or bad).
I think we have to remember that porn is porn and art is art. Then there is Porn-Art which is a niche. Porn without the art is much, much bigger on the Internet because pretty much everyone is looking to bust a nut and when you are jacking off, you could care less about Photoshop, lingerie and some moke's villa on the Med.